Pharmacist Salaries Hit $117K and Keep Climbing

In 2012, average gross salary for pharmacists at retail, mail, and specialty pharmacies was $117,000—up 2.7% from 2011.

Of the 1,089 occupations in the Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) survey, the “pharmacist” classification ranked 35th in compensation. (The top 10 most highly compensated U.S. occupations are all physician-related.)

The “pharmacist” occupation code is 29-1051. Using these data, I identified pharmacists working at retail, mail, and specialty pharmacies by analyzing the following NAICS (North American Industry Classification System) industries:

For the first time, pharmacists at mass merchants had the highest average pharmacist salaries. Pharmacists at mass merchants, who also saw the biggest pay jump, now earn a full-time average of $117,990 (+3.8%).

Average annual salaries at supermarkets and mail pharmacies are lower than those in other retail formats, at about $110,000.

The National Community Pharmacists Association (NCPA) recently asserted: “Pharmacists are under-appreciated, judging by the design of many public and private sector prescription drug plans.” These salary data tell a very different story.

Physicians have "Health care provider status" and make on average $212,000 per year. Nearly two-times the amount of a PharmD.

(Via Medscape 2012 Study)

Pharmacists on average are at $117K and are not officially recognized as health care providers. However - studies show the drastic impact pharmacist have on patient therapy outcomes, lowering health care expenses, and preventing the patient from sliding back into their initial condition.

If pharmacists were properly compensated by the same system physicians via Medicare for their "services" and completely included in the total-patient-care-cycle the patient would be better off in many cases.

Under the current Medicare system, pharmacists are only paid for providing patient care services that are "incident to" that of a physician's service. This means that pharmacists working in outpatient settings can only bill for a small number of services — limiting patient access to those services — and that care for high-risk patients is not covered.

There is a wealth of research demonstrating that pharmacists functioning in a provider or clinical role, as opposed to just dispensing, contribute value to the patient or system equal to 4-5 times their compensation. That's a bargain in any business.

Yes, perhaps pharmacists should be providers. But be careful with your numbers. Increasing average retail, mail, and specialty pharmacist salaries to $212K would add about $18 billion to health care costs. And if salaries continue to increase, expect a substitution effect (more pharmacy techs, more automation).

Please, I think you are oversimplifying a little. Pharmacists salaries are not necessarily tied to how profitable a pharmacy is. It's based on the market like everything else, and stores with pharmacies get more customers and buy over the counter items as well. There are many stores, like Target, that use a profit-loss model for there pharmacies. The reimbursement statistics are there, and I know you have access to them just like I do. Clinically, pharmacist save hospitals millions of dollars, and if we really added up years of education along with the liability associated with being a pharmacist, it's among the lowest reimbursed in the medical profession.

Yes, I agree that pharmacists can be underutilized relative to their professional training. Certain activities can/should be delegated to less-highly trained and compensated employees, e.g., techs, automated filing machines. In reality, not every prescription requires the full suite of pharmacist capabilities. This is a challenge to today's pharmacy industry economics, per my comments in What Free Generic Lipitor Says about Pharmacy's Future.

While pharmacists may not complain about salaries, they do complain about reimbursement. Since payroll expenses are 60%-70% of a pharmacy's gross profits, complaints about reimbursement are an indirect critique of salaries.

As far as pharmacist complaints on reimbursement, the only one's I here about are when a drug is reimbursed $72 below acquisition cost. That is the amount I was told yesterday by a pharmacist. Regardless of the reimbursement on all of the other prescriptions dispensed, no business should have to pay to provide a service. I think if there were more transparency in MAC prices, and a better system to review acquisition cost in this circumstance, many of the complaints about reimbursement would subside.

Which is better, less pharmacists making making 200+k per year or more making 100+k per year. Oversimplifying?? yes, but that is what you would get. School teachers and marines deserve to paid more as well, I'm sure they would be happy with 100+k per year.

DISCLAIMERThe analyses on this website are based on information and data that are in the public domain. Any conclusions, findings, opinions, or recommendations are based on our own experienced and professional judgment and interpretations given the information available. While all information is believed to be reliable at the time of writing, the information provided here is for reference use only and does not constitute the rendering of legal, financial, commercial, or other professional advice by Pembroke Consulting, Inc., Drug Channels Institute, or the author. Any reliance upon the information is at your own risk, and Pembroke Consulting, Inc., Drug Channels Institute, and the author shall not be responsible for any liability arising from or related to the use or accuracy of the information in any way. Pembroke Consulting, Inc., and Drug Channels Institute do not make investment recommendations, on this website or otherwise. Nothing on this website should be interpreted as an opinion by Pembroke Consulting, Inc., Drug Channels Institute, or the author on the investment prospects of specific companies.

The comments contained on this site come from members of the public and do not necessarily reflect the views of Drug Channels Institute or the author. Neither Drug Channels Institute nor the author endorse or approve of their content. Drug Channels Institute and the author reserve the right to remove or block comments, but are under no obligation to explain individual moderation decisions.

The public domain use of our materials includes linking to our website. You do not need to obtain special permission to link to the Drug Channels site. The material on this site is protected by copyright law. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this material may result in severe civil and criminal penalties and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent of the law. This report may be cited in commercial documents with full and appropriate attribution. We do not intend to reduce, limit, or restrict any rights arising from fair use under copyright law or other applicable laws. We do not permit our articles to be republished without prior written permission.

The content of Sponsored Posts does not necessarily reflect the views of Pembroke Consulting, Inc., Drug Channels Institute, or any of its employees.